California legislature rescinds calls for federal constitutional convention amid risk concerns

In a pivotal meeting of the California State Senate Judiciary Committee, lawmakers took a decisive step to safeguard the state's constitutional integrity. Under the bright lights of the chamber, discussions unfolded around Senate Joint Resolution 1 (SJR 1), which aims to rescind all previous calls for a federal constitutional convention made by California over the past century.

The urgency of this resolution stems from the growing number of states approaching the threshold needed to trigger a constitutional convention—34 states. Some lawmakers expressed concern that this could lead to a "runaway convention," where the scope of discussions could expand beyond the intended topics, potentially jeopardizing fundamental rights and civil liberties.

Dora Rose, Deputy Director of the League of Women Voters of California and a key supporter of the resolution, emphasized the risks associated with an Article V convention. She warned that once convened, such a convention could rewrite any part of the Constitution without limitations, a scenario that feels particularly precarious in today's political climate. Rose highlighted that California currently has seven active calls for constitutional conventions, and rescinding them would prevent the state from inadvertently contributing to a process that could undermine civil rights.

McKay Cunningham, a constitutional law professor, echoed these sentiments, stressing the lack of rules governing the convention process. He pointed out that the current political landscape, marked by aggressive rhetoric from far-right groups, poses a significant threat to rights such as reproductive freedom and protections for marginalized communities.

The committee's discussions reflect a broader concern about the potential consequences of a constitutional convention, particularly as some factions seek to use it as a means to solidify their political agendas. With SJR 1, California aims to send a clear message: the state will not be complicit in dismantling the democratic principles and rights that have been hard-won over the years.

As the meeting concluded, the resolution stood as a testament to California's commitment to protecting its citizens' rights amidst a turbulent national dialogue. The implications of this decision extend beyond state lines, signaling a cautious approach to constitutional reform in an era of uncertainty.